Post: #226

Pretty annoying about the KP situation, he had his career cut short through the politics within English Cricket.

Post: #227

This current Ashes series is impossible to predict. Both side have dominated a test each and been comprehensively dominated as well.

Crowd atmosphere looks good and just the right amount of banter and sledging.

Clarke just to the crease....looks in trouble and down on form and confidence.

Looks like ill be burning the midnight oil.

Post: #228

What the hell is wrong with Australia? Seems like they are as bad as subcontinental teams in these swinging conditions in England

Post: #229

I was just about to revive this thread given Australia's embarrassing performance.

Stuart Broad 6 wickets in about 10 overs. He was 5/6 at one stage!

The Aussies will be out by lunch and England should win it within 2 days

EDIT: Broad finishes 8/18 and Australia bowled out for 60. Amazing.

Post: #230

(08-06-2015 06:36 AM)big poppa Wrote:  I was just about to revive this thread given Australia's embarrassing performance.

Stuart Broad 6 wickets in about 10 overs. He was 5/6 at one stage!

The Aussies will be out by lunch and England should win it within 2 days.

While I do admire Australian cricket team, it seems to me that they have dark days ahead. The only reliable batsman they have at test level is Chris Rogers and he would be retiring after this series. David Warner and Michael Clarke are great at playing in Australia and South Africa but not so great elsewhere. Even wonderkid Steve Smith has been found out in this series. Australia would keep producing great fast bowlers though. As i speak, Australia is all out for 60.

Post: #231

(08-06-2015 06:41 AM)Goelsaab Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 06:36 AM)big poppa Wrote:  I was just about to revive this thread given Australia's embarrassing performance.

Stuart Broad 6 wickets in about 10 overs. He was 5/6 at one stage!

The Aussies will be out by lunch and England should win it within 2 days.

While I do admire Australian cricket team, it seems to me that they have dark days ahead. The only reliable batsman they have at test level is Chris Rogers and he would be retiring after this series. David Warner and Michael Clarke are great at playing in Australia and South Africa but not so great elsewhere. Even wonderkid Steve Smith has been found out in this series. Australia would keep producing great fast bowlers though. As i speak, Australia is all out for 60.

Yep, they're a very old team and this series has confirmed that they have huge issues with their top order batsmen.

They need to make some brave decisions before it gets really ugly really fast.

Post: #232

Almost sort of yin and yang,isn't it? The late departures of McGrath, Warne, Langer and Hayden ensured that the Australian team stayed at top for a long time but it sort of hampered the development of younger players, with the result that you have had people like Ed Cowan, Rob Quiney playing in the first XI of Aussie team in last couple of years. The problem with top order has existed for a long while, easily since 2008(since when Ponting became a shadow of his former self).

Post: #233

We are just seeing the beginning of the end of test cricket I think.

Post: #234

While I enjoy watching great Test bowling more than anything else, I fucking hate Stuart Broad.

It is very surprising how poorly the Aussies are performing. Obviously Ryan Harris' absence was going to be huge. Mitch Johnson performs 2x better when he has Harris there to apply pressure. They should not have dropped Haddin, and Clarke is done.

I still think the Aussies can win this match, and the series, but no true good Aussie unit lets the other side clobber them after their best bowler gets hurt.

Post: #235

(08-06-2015 11:09 AM)Slim Shady Wrote:  While I enjoy watching great Test bowling more than anything else, I fucking hate Stuart Broad.

It is very surprising how poorly the Aussies are performing. Obviously Ryan Harris' absence was going to be huge. Mitch Johnson performs 2x better when he has Harris there to apply pressure. They should not have dropped Haddin, and Clarke is done.

I still think the Aussies can win this match, and the series, but no true good Aussie unit lets the other side clobber them after their best bowler gets hurt.

You must be the most optimistic person alive. They'll be behind by a minimum of 250 when they bat again. Reckon they'd need to give themselves a minimum of 250 as a lead to bowl England out which means they'd need at least 500. That's not happening with the state of that middle order which has been nonexistent for the entirety of the series, then you have Warner and Smith who can't seem to play with any restraint and thus will get out cheaply more likely than not. The last two tests have been some of the poorest batting I've seen in by a supposed top side in quite some time.

Post: #236

I re-evaluated my assessment after I saw that David Warner was bowling.

Australia's goose is cooked.

Post: #237

(08-06-2015 11:09 AM)Slim Shady Wrote:  While I enjoy watching great Test bowling more than anything else, I fucking hate Stuart Broad.

It is very surprising how poorly the Aussies are performing. Obviously Ryan Harris' absence was going to be huge. Mitch Johnson performs 2x better when he has Harris there to apply pressure. They should not have dropped Haddin, and Clarke is done.

I still think the Aussies can win this match, and the series, but no true good Aussie unit lets the other side clobber them after their best bowler gets hurt.

I hate both James Anderson and Stuart Broad. They are no Waqar-Wasim and yet, teams succumb to them.

Ryan Harris, now that was a bowler. I rate him above Dale Steyn in terms of pure skills as a bowler. I have almost never seen Ryan Harris hit around and I have not seen any bowler in last 10 years who bowled a higher proportion of wicket taking deliveries. I am surprised at Clarke's deterioration. Looked an all time great in 2011-12.

Post: #238

Quote:I fucking hate Stuart Broad.

Quote:I hate both James Anderson and Stuart Broad.

Whats up with the Stuart Broad hate?
Anderson and Broad are both brilliant bowlers in test match cricket in English conditions.

Post: #239

Embarrassing.

Post: #240

(08-06-2015 01:36 PM)tylerdurden1993 Wrote:  

Quote:I fucking hate Stuart Broad.

Quote:I hate both James Anderson and Stuart Broad.

Whats up with the Stuart Broad hate?
Anderson and Broad are both brilliant bowlers in test match cricket in English conditions.

I will concede most of the hate is because of perception of him as a whiny, entitled idiot. Case in point- Broad is prone to take a review of umpire's decision on his own bowling. You will find players like that almost in every team. Shane Watson is probably the Australian equivalent.

Post: #241

Deleted the duplicate post.

Post: #242

Just saw a female cricketer being well, a female on cricinfo twitter

Sara McGlashan ✔ @sjmac7
Low run rate in Women's Ashes- slammed. Low run rate in Men's Ashes- good discipline. Haha #smallsteps

Post: #243

I've watched a womans cricket game. It was like watching primary school cricket. Why do these female athletes try so hard to get us to think of them as equals?

Post: #244

I have been noticing recently that cricket is rapidly becoming mangina-ised. I mean not only the Chris Gayle episode, where harmless joking was blown into a giant clusterfuck. Now a days, you hear female television commentators. They understand nothing about high level cricket. I found out by googling that the fastest ball bowled in women's cricket was timed at 125 kph (78 mph). I mean I was timed at that pace when I was 21 and I was not even good enough to play domestic cricket in India. I am told by one mangina who follows their cricket that the woman who bowled it is about 10 kph quicker than second fastest female seamer and that it is routine that 110 kph(68 mph) in women's cricket deserves the kind of respect that 140 kph(87 mph) delivery gets in men's cricket. This game will surely be unwatchable in near future, the way it is going.

Post: #245

Bump.

Some good Test Cricket been going on.

Where are my fellow Cricket fans?

Post: #246

(06-02-2016 08:54 AM)Goelsaab Wrote:  I have been noticing recently that cricket is rapidly becoming mangina-ised. I mean not only the Chris Gayle episode, where harmless joking was blown into a giant clusterfuck. Now a days, you hear female television commentators. They understand nothing about high level cricket. I found out by googling that the fastest ball bowled in women's cricket was timed at 125 kph (78 mph). I mean I was timed at that pace when I was 21 and I was not even good enough to play domestic cricket in India. I am told by one mangina who follows their cricket that the woman who bowled it is about 10 kph quicker than second fastest female seamer and that it is routine that 110 kph(68 mph) in women's cricket deserves the kind of respect that 140 kph(87 mph) delivery gets in men's cricket. This game will surely be unwatchable in near future, the way it is going.

A big part of the problem with cricket is the BCCI. E.g blocking the 2 tier test system. And to be honest indian fans.

Women's cricket is about as intersting as women's football (soccer). Yes I have noticed they have starting bringing in commentators who played "high level" female sport in to male sport. One of the funniest is in rugby, perhaps the most physical game in the world. And you have some woman talking about it......

Cricket isn't as good as it was for sure. There aren't many decent FAST bowlers these days. The bat is on top of the ball in this generation. Great test cricket involves unbearable tension.

I struggle to see how anyone can get excited about t20 cricket. I mean it's just slogging with a very random outcome and virtually no context. Who even cares if you win.

Post: #247

(09-30-2016 06:48 AM)hv123 Wrote:  

(06-02-2016 08:54 AM)Goelsaab Wrote:  I have been noticing recently that cricket is rapidly becoming mangina-ised. I mean not only the Chris Gayle episode, where harmless joking was blown into a giant clusterfuck. Now a days, you hear female television commentators. They understand nothing about high level cricket. I found out by googling that the fastest ball bowled in women's cricket was timed at 125 kph (78 mph). I mean I was timed at that pace when I was 21 and I was not even good enough to play domestic cricket in India. I am told by one mangina who follows their cricket that the woman who bowled it is about 10 kph quicker than second fastest female seamer and that it is routine that 110 kph(68 mph) in women's cricket deserves the kind of respect that 140 kph(87 mph) delivery gets in men's cricket. This game will surely be unwatchable in near future, the way it is going.

A big part of the problem with cricket is the BCCI. E.g blocking the 2 tier test system. And to be honest indian fans.

Women's cricket is about as intersting as women's football (soccer). Yes I have noticed they have starting bringing in commentators who played "high level" female sport in to male sport. One of the funniest is in rugby, perhaps the most physical game in the world. And you have some woman talking about it......

Cricket isn't as good as it was for sure. There aren't many decent FAST bowlers these days. The bat is on top of the ball in this generation. Great test cricket involves unbearable tension.

I struggle to see how anyone can get excited about t20 cricket. I mean it's just slogging with a very random outcome and virtually no context. Who even cares if you win.

T20 is the only cricket my West Indies team is good at nowadays... I'll take it.
The problem in cricket is that only T20 has money coming in and from now till the foreseeable future, This will be the format that is most popular. It puts fans in the stands and the players are all gravitating towards it. Because of that i don't think we'll see much stroke play from batsmen and too much fast bowling from bowlers.

In this new era it's about hitting the ball far and variations as a bowler.

Post: #248

(09-30-2016 08:35 AM)zigZag Wrote:  

(09-30-2016 06:48 AM)hv123 Wrote:  

(06-02-2016 08:54 AM)Goelsaab Wrote:  I have been noticing recently that cricket is rapidly becoming mangina-ised. I mean not only the Chris Gayle episode, where harmless joking was blown into a giant clusterfuck. Now a days, you hear female television commentators. They understand nothing about high level cricket. I found out by googling that the fastest ball bowled in women's cricket was timed at 125 kph (78 mph). I mean I was timed at that pace when I was 21 and I was not even good enough to play domestic cricket in India. I am told by one mangina who follows their cricket that the woman who bowled it is about 10 kph quicker than second fastest female seamer and that it is routine that 110 kph(68 mph) in women's cricket deserves the kind of respect that 140 kph(87 mph) delivery gets in men's cricket. This game will surely be unwatchable in near future, the way it is going.

A big part of the problem with cricket is the BCCI. E.g blocking the 2 tier test system. And to be honest indian fans.

Women's cricket is about as intersting as women's football (soccer). Yes I have noticed they have starting bringing in commentators who played "high level" female sport in to male sport. One of the funniest is in rugby, perhaps the most physical game in the world. And you have some woman talking about it......

Cricket isn't as good as it was for sure. There aren't many decent FAST bowlers these days. The bat is on top of the ball in this generation. Great test cricket involves unbearable tension.

I struggle to see how anyone can get excited about t20 cricket. I mean it's just slogging with a very random outcome and virtually no context. Who even cares if you win.

T20 is the only cricket my West Indies team is good at nowadays... I'll take it.
The problem in cricket is that only T20 has money coming in and from now till the foreseeable future, This will be the format that is most popular. It puts fans in the stands and the players are all gravitating towards it. Because of that i don't think we'll see much stroke play from batsmen and too much fast bowling from bowlers.

In this new era it's about hitting the ball far and variations as a bowler.

Do you actually get genuinely interested in it like a classic 5 test series? e.g winning the ashes. Like Brian Lara batting to Glen McGrath. Windies chasing 418 to win. Winning the big smash epic 20/20 series against so and so beating the Sometown Blueballs along the way, I fail to see the context which can make sport interesting.

Honestly I've never managed to watch more than a few overs of 20/20. The cringe factor with the cheer leaders, neon lights and forced excitement of the commentators is too high.

Just because lots of people like it doesn't make it good. Lots of people are Hillary voters.

It's a shame to watch the west indies slide from a great team of towering bowlers and pure class batsmen to a glorified version of bangladesh or zimbabwe.

Post: #249

(09-30-2016 09:29 AM)hv123 Wrote:  

(09-30-2016 08:35 AM)zigZag Wrote:  

(09-30-2016 06:48 AM)hv123 Wrote:  

(06-02-2016 08:54 AM)Goelsaab Wrote:  I have been noticing recently that cricket is rapidly becoming mangina-ised. I mean not only the Chris Gayle episode, where harmless joking was blown into a giant clusterfuck. Now a days, you hear female television commentators. They understand nothing about high level cricket. I found out by googling that the fastest ball bowled in women's cricket was timed at 125 kph (78 mph). I mean I was timed at that pace when I was 21 and I was not even good enough to play domestic cricket in India. I am told by one mangina who follows their cricket that the woman who bowled it is about 10 kph quicker than second fastest female seamer and that it is routine that 110 kph(68 mph) in women's cricket deserves the kind of respect that 140 kph(87 mph) delivery gets in men's cricket. This game will surely be unwatchable in near future, the way it is going.

A big part of the problem with cricket is the BCCI. E.g blocking the 2 tier test system. And to be honest indian fans.

Women's cricket is about as intersting as women's football (soccer). Yes I have noticed they have starting bringing in commentators who played "high level" female sport in to male sport. One of the funniest is in rugby, perhaps the most physical game in the world. And you have some woman talking about it......

Cricket isn't as good as it was for sure. There aren't many decent FAST bowlers these days. The bat is on top of the ball in this generation. Great test cricket involves unbearable tension.

I struggle to see how anyone can get excited about t20 cricket. I mean it's just slogging with a very random outcome and virtually no context. Who even cares if you win.

T20 is the only cricket my West Indies team is good at nowadays... I'll take it.
The problem in cricket is that only T20 has money coming in and from now till the foreseeable future, This will be the format that is most popular. It puts fans in the stands and the players are all gravitating towards it. Because of that i don't think we'll see much stroke play from batsmen and too much fast bowling from bowlers.

In this new era it's about hitting the ball far and variations as a bowler.

Do you actually get genuinely interested in it like a classic 5 test series? e.g winning the ashes. Like Brian Lara batting to Glen McGrath. Windies chasing 418 to win. Winning the big smash epic 20/20 series against so and so beating the Sometown Blueballs along the way, I fail to see the context which can make sport interesting.

Honestly I've never managed to watch more than a few overs of 20/20. The cringe factor with the cheer leaders, neon lights and forced excitement of the commentators is too high.

Just because lots of people like it doesn't make it good. Lots of people are Hillary voters.

It's a shame to watch the west indies slide from a great team of towering bowlers and pure class batsmen to a glorified version of bangladesh or zimbabwe.

Well for sure it's not as technical. My favorite cricket videos are of Courtney Walsh and Curtley Ambrose Knocking over England for less than 100 runs. Test match will always be better. There is good entertainment in T20 though especially when Chris Gayle is on it.

However, There is no more money in Test cricket. This is a job for players and like you and me they will want to go where the most money is and they are chosing T20. Which means they will develop less technical fundamentals needed in test matches.

Test Match is great but it's dying because of the popularity of T20 is essentially what i'm saying.

Post: #250

I agree you are right that test match cricket is dying, but what I would ask is do you think you it would still be dying if there was no t20 cricket. Personally I think yes it would still be on the decline, just not to the same extent. t20 just fills a need for low attention span modern audiences. People are very busy doing nothing these days.